Compare Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man vs Ad Astra

An apparent CGI hat is called conspicuously poor, creating a distracting visual blemish in the effects work.

Digital effects are praised for looking seamless and supporting the story rather than substituting for it. Planetary vistas and large-scale space imagery provide considerable spectacle.

An apparent CGI hat is called distractingly bad, standing out as a conspicuous weakness in the effects work.

Seamless visual effects and expansive space imagery give the journey substantial spectacle. The technical polish remains a strength even for viewers disappointed by the human story.

Tommy’s spiritual and gypsy side is praised as one of the most worthwhile expansions of his character in the film.

The women occupy small, sometimes stereotypical roles around the male lead. Critics of that imbalance find the wife's largely silent presence especially limiting.

Period immersion is weakened for some by modern-looking styling, oversized stakes, and questionable wartime plausibility. The film’s stylized mythmaking of Tommy also draws skepticism.

The everyday commercial details and lived-in colonies are frequently convincing. Scientific liberties, especially around travel, gunplay and the late space maneuvers, limit that credibility for skeptical viewers.

Some newcomers report following the story surprisingly easily without heavy recaps, but other reviews point to shaky logic or exposition that does too much work.

The basic mission is easy to follow, but late logistics and character decisions can become hazy or illogical. Some viewers find the future setting insufficiently explained despite the extensive narration.

Several set pieces generate strong tension and claustrophobia, especially the pub and tunnel material. Negative reviews say predictability weakens the climax and removes the sharper twists associated with the series.

The opening disaster, lunar chase and mayday stop can generate strong tension. The quieter stretches lose urgency for critics who feel the stakes stay theoretical or the mystery stalls.

The eerie, supernatural-leaning material is praised as some of the eeriest material the franchise has attempted.

The mayday encounter and other implied horrors can be genuinely unnerving, sometimes through restraint rather than prolonged exposure. Some critics wish those scares had more sustained purpose.

Many reviewers see the movie as a familiar one-last-job epilogue or a reworking of old Peaky Blinders beats. A smaller group praises its bolder choices and fresh generational angle.

The unusual atmosphere, setting and artistic combination of familiar elements feel distinctive to admirers. Detractors hear too many echoes of earlier space films and see a conventional paternal story underneath.

The ending is intensely divisive: many call it fitting, powerful, or even perfect closure for Tommy, while others believe it needlessly overturns the stronger symbolism of Season 6.

The finish splits opinion sharply: some find earned forgiveness and meaningful closure, while others call the reunion anticlimactic. Its explicit message and loose logistics are frequent sticking points.

Pacing is the most consistent weakness: the first half is repeatedly described as slow or drawn out, while the later material can feel rushed as too much story is compressed into feature length.

The patient tempo lets Roy's inward journey breathe for some viewers. Slowdowns, especially in the second half, repeatedly draw complaints of boredom and lost momentum.

Legacy, grief, trauma, memory, family inheritance, and self-definition give the film substantial thematic weight. Critics who resist the movie argue these ideas are compressed, overplayed, or left insufficiently explored.

Masculinity, abandonment, faith and human connection give the film room for several readings. Admirers find that depth rewarding; skeptics see familiar ideas presented with too much explanation.

The central comeback structure, Nazi scheme, and legacy conflict are often described as familiar or clichéd, with several critics saying the film rarely finds a genuinely new plot shape.

A familiar search for a missing father structures the adventure. Some appreciate its departure from conventional payoff, while others find the quest derivative and predictable.

Murphy and Keoghan’s father-son dynamic is often described as raw, magnetic, and powerful. A smaller group felt the pair never generated the expected sparks or emotional bond.

The restrained father-son scenes can carry wrenching power, while the brief encounters on Mars bring a welcome emotional charge. These connections work best for viewers invested in Roy's interior life.

The action lands best once Tommy returns to Birmingham, with the pub confrontation, shootouts, explosions, and finale frequently singled out. Critics who wanted more momentum found the action too delayed or the climax predictable.

The opening fall and moon-rover chase are recurring highlights, admired for their scale, invention and graceful staging. Some viewers find the violent detours disconnected from the central journey.

The core legacy-and-war story is compelling and emotionally satisfying for many reviewers, but others call the movie unnecessary, thin, half-baked, or unable to justify rewriting the series’ prior ending.

An intimate search for meaning unfolds across a vast interplanetary mission. Reactions depend on whether its simple paternal core feels absorbing and mythic or thin and overexplained.

The strongest readings focus on legacy, self-definition, family, and the cost of valuing power over people. One severe critic felt the film squandered the larger sense of purpose built around Tommy.

The turn toward human connection and responsibility resonates strongly with supporters. Others find the humanist and religious ideas too familiar, sentimental or overtly stated.

The score is repeatedly praised for building dread, atmosphere, and intensity, especially as Tommy’s return pushes the film toward its climax.

The score is repeatedly praised for eerie electronic textures and emotionally expansive orchestration. Its restraint and later warmth often do more to carry feeling than the dialogue.

The romantic material fares poorly, with Tommy’s sex scene described as cheesy rather than convincing.

The estranged wife is usually a distant image rather than a developed partner. Her thin, largely silent role weakens the marital dimension for several critics.

The film’s grief-heavy, introspective drama gives Tommy’s final chapter weight for many viewers, though its persistent misery and brooding occasionally overwhelm the entertainment.

The father-son story can turn an enormous space journey into intimate emotional drama. Detractors find the confrontation tepid or conventional enough to weaken the spectacle around it.

As a gangster-period-drama send-off, the movie retains much of the show’s identity and pulp energy. Several critics still feel it plays more like an extended television episode than a fully realized feature.

This is thoughtful, psychologically focused space cinema with intermittent blockbuster spectacle. It rewards viewers receptive to that combination, but does not consistently satisfy expectations of action or scientific rigor.

Dialogue receives mixed marks: some reviewers praise sharp lines and economical exposition, while others call it simplistic, clunky, corny, or overly explanatory.

Some lines provide sharp humor or a moving humanist thought. More often, complaints focus on therapy-like declarations and dialogue that spells out ideas already visible on screen.

Tom Harper is frequently praised for confident staging, visual control, suspense, and explosive set pieces. A few reviews fault specific tonal or narrative choices even while admiring the filmmaking.

Gray's control of scale, atmosphere and quietly staged action earns considerable admiration. His insistence on a solemn, explicitly explained paternal journey is more divisive.

The cinematography is the clearest consensus strength, praised for striking light, shadow, mud, rubble, wintry landscapes, and a genuinely cinematic sense of scale.

The photography is the most dependable attraction: intimate facial close-ups sit against immense planetary landscapes. Color, shadow and carefully composed images make even skeptical critics admire the presentation.

Hazy reverie-style editorial cuts are criticized as visually cheesy and as interruptions to the otherwise painterly presentation.

The cutting can flow smoothly through the hypnotic voyage, but some passages feel like disconnected episodes. The released edit also drew criticism from the director over lost creative control.

The sombre, gothic, highly stylized mood works for some as a fitting final chapter, but others find the film tonally off, overly miserable, campy, or caught awkwardly between old and new Peaky Blinders.

The meditative, somber atmosphere can feel hypnotic and carefully sustained. Others find it oppressive or awkwardly interrupted by pulpy action.

At roughly feature length, the movie often feels too compressed for the number of character turns and plot developments it attempts. Several reviewers explicitly wish the story had been a season or miniseries instead.

For some, the full journey stays engaging; for many others, a simple story is stretched beyond what it can sustain. The drawn-out later passages are the clearest source of length complaints.

Tommy’s reckoning with grief and Duke’s struggle with his father’s legacy work for many reviewers, but the compressed format leaves several supporting characters—and, for some, Duke himself—feeling thin or underdeveloped.

Roy's gradual emotional opening is compelling to many, especially through Pitt's small gestures. Others struggle to connect with him and find the supporting characters, particularly the women, thinly developed.

Dark comedy—especially the Garrison grenade sequence and father-son mud fight—provides welcome relief from the gloom. A few detractors find some of the comic touches cheesy rather than sharp.

Commercial flights charging for pillows and familiar businesses on the moon provide welcome satirical touches. The overall solemnity leaves some viewers wishing for more levity.

The script earns credit for themes, twists, and some strong dialogue, but criticism is substantial: exposition, clichés, rushed character work, and compressed plotting repeatedly surface.

Supporters admire nuanced character ideas and the tension between institutional duty and personal need. Repeated criticism centers on obvious exposition, familiar paternal themes and questionable plot decisions.

For supporters, the film delivers grief, regret, family conflict, and a powerful farewell with real force. Detractors found key deaths rushed, contrived, or too hollow to land.

For admirers, Roy's restraint makes his eventual vulnerability deeply moving. Other viewers remain outside the characters' lives and leave more drained than affected.

Aggregated critical reaction is broadly favorable but not uniform, with enthusiasm for craft and performances tempered by repeated complaints about pacing, script compression, and sequel necessity.

The supplied account describes a strongly favorable critical reception. That enthusiasm sits alongside a much more divided collection of individual reactions to the story.

Longtime Peaky Blinders fans are the clearest audience, especially for the callbacks and emotional closure. Reviewers disagree on newcomers: some found the film easy to follow, while others strongly recommend watching the series first.

Patient viewers who enjoy contemplative science fiction are the clearest fit. The quiet lead and inward focus can frustrate anyone expecting a fast space adventure.

The big-screen outing is framed as earned and worth paying for, with the theatrical presentation treated as part of the appeal.

The visual experience can justify a matinee for one speaker, while another recommends waiting for a rental. These qualified recommendations reflect admiration for the spectacle alongside disappointment with the story.

Rewatch interest is sharply polarized: one enthusiastic reviewer immediately wanted another viewing, while several detractors say they would not revisit it and even feel it harms the series’ rewatchability.

Some enthusiastic viewers plan a second viewing to revisit the film's themes and imagery. Those who find the journey emotionally empty prefer returning to other science-fiction films.

Reactions range from gripping, highly enjoyable fan service to dull, hollow, or unnecessary viewing. A common middle ground is that the movie becomes much more entertaining after its slow first half.

The visual journey can be mesmerizing and even thrilling between its quiet stretches. Enjoyment falls substantially when the slow paternal drama fails to create personal investment.

The soundscape can feel forceful and theatrical, with one review highlighting Dolby Atmos impact and another calling the sound design incredible. A major dissent criticizes an aggressive music-to-dialogue mix.

Quiet lunar action and carefully placed sound cues strengthen the sense of isolation and danger. The sonic presentation is a major reason to seek an immersive screening.

For supporters, Birmingham and the Peaky underworld feel convincingly restored and expanded into wartime. Critics miss the old ensemble and argue the newer, thinner supporting world makes the film feel smaller than the series.

Commercialized lunar life and remote Martian bases offer imaginative, recognizable glimpses of the future. Some viewers relish the hints, while others want a more fully developed setting.

Blitz-era Birmingham, grime, rubble, docks, pubs, and warehouses are generally rendered with impressive tactile detail and scale. One negative review thought parts of the production looked like a soundstage.

Retrofuturistic ships, commercialized lunar terminals and rust-colored Martian interiors create a striking, often convincing setting. A dissenting view questions the practicality of transparent interfaces.

The visual presentation is consistently celebrated: smoky interiors, chiaroscuro lighting, slow-motion swagger, period grime, and large-scale wartime imagery make the movie look distinctly cinematic.

Planetary landscapes, dramatic lighting and close studies of Pitt's face give the film a striking visual identity. Its beauty is a reliable strength even when the drama divides opinion.

Cillian Murphy’s return as Tommy is overwhelmingly praised for its weary stillness, menace, grief, and emotional control; even harsh critics routinely identify him as a major strength.

Pitt is widely admired for conveying hurt and change through a tightly controlled exterior. A few critics find that restraint wooden, while supporters rank it among his strongest performances.

The cast is one of the film’s safest bets: even many negative reviews praise the performances, with the central actors repeatedly credited for elevating uneven material.

Brad Pitt's controlled performance draws broad praise, with several critics also admiring Tommy Lee Jones and the brief supporting turns. A smaller group finds the lead too wooden or emotionally distant.

Modern-rock needle drops remain a signature strength and are widely praised for driving emotion and atmosphere. A few reviewers find the choices dated, overly loud, or less appealing outside the iconic theme reprise.

The music supplies atmosphere, emotional lift and a sense of cosmic scale. Its subdued passages and richer orchestration are among the film's most consistently admired elements.

The supporting ensemble is generally considered strong, particularly Keoghan, Roth, Rundle, Graham, and Ferguson. The bigger complaint is often that the movie underuses them or gives their characters too little depth.

Jones, Negga and Sutherland receive praise for expressive, often very brief performances. The cast's limited screen time and the thin opportunities given to several characters remain common reservations.

The choice of performers earns praise, especially Pitt as the restrained lead and Jones as the intimidating father. Strong casting does not always translate into substantial supporting roles.

Photography, production design and music can work together with striking coherence. The director's account of losing control over the released cut introduces a separate concern about the studio collaboration.

The hero's responsibility for other astronauts' deaths attracts criticism when the story turns back toward his personal mission. The celebratory return can feel insufficiently attentive to those consequences.

The film restores the show’s swagger, music, visual language, and callbacks, satisfying many longtime fans. Others see missing characters and major legacy decisions as betrayals of the series’ established arcs.

Parental abandonment and the fear of becoming one's father give the voyage its human stakes. The same focus feels poignant to some and overly familiar or bluntly explained to others.

The missing expedition gives the early journey an intriguing question and a sense of anticipation. Its final explanation disappoints viewers who expect a stronger revelation.

The production's tangible, lived-in surfaces earn praise for their unshowy craftsmanship. Practical artistry helps make the stations and interiors feel inhabited.

Recognizable airlines and fast-food chains make space colonization amusingly mundane. These brands are generally appreciated as satire and grounding details rather than glamorous futuristic decoration.

The sexual material draws a negative reaction because Tommy’s sex scene is viewed as cheesy and out of place.

The Latin title can be an awkward first impression for viewers unsure how to pronounce it. One viewer finds that difficulty an obstacle to approaching the film.

The film’s cold-blooded, stylized violence generally fits the franchise’s appeal and is often balanced with swagger or dark humor, though it can edge into grim excess for some viewers.

The return of Tommy’s tailored Peaky Blinders look remains a major visual pleasure, with covetable coats and sharp suiting earning praise. One review found Duke’s modern-looking styling immersion-breaking.

Reviewers appreciate the use of World War II events and the counterfeit-currency plot as historical grounding. Others question specific period details, plausibility, or the sentimental elevation of Tommy within wartime history.

Several viewers feel the trailers promise more action than the finished film supplies, and one critic objects to spoiled encounters. Another praises the campaign for outlining the drama without revealing its particulars.

The narration divides viewers between those who need it to connect with the reserved lead and those who find it redundant. Its therapy-like wording and tendency to verbalize subtext attract repeated criticism.